What about Chuck Leavell's role?

Interesting source (click on the link for the whole stuff):
[www.relix.com]
"...Mick (Taylor) is also much loved by the fans (not by Leavell?) for his time with the band. He brought a lot to the table in those years and brought it with him to the stage for these shows. It was tough to only have them (guest artists) play a song or two, but we also wanted to accommodate the other guest artists—and, of course, to play as the core band we have now. Eric (Clapton) was a highlight for me as I played with him for two-and-a-half years. He killed it on “Champagne and Reefer.” Mick doing “Midnight Rambler” made for a cool jam (didn't kill)..." CL

A model of stonewalling...


PS Leavell is musical director and setlist "inspirer" of the Rolling Stones
Italics are mine



Edited 12 time(s). Last edit at 2013-07-20 12:25 by MarkSchneider.

Quote
MarkSchneider
What about Chuck Leavell's role?

Interesting source (click on the link for the whole stuff):
[www.relix.com]
"...Mick (Taylor) is also much loved by the fans (not by Leavell?) for his time with the band. He brought a lot to the table in those years and brought it with him to the stage for these shows. It was tough to only have them (guest artists) play a song or two, but we also wanted to accommodate the other guest artists—and, of course, to play as the core band we have now. Eric (Clapton) was a highlight for me as I played with him for two-and-a-half years. He killed it on “Champagne and Reefer.” Mick doing “Midnight Rambler” made for a cool jam (didn't kill)..." CL

A model of stonewalling...


PS Leavell is musical director and setlist "inspirer" of the Rolling Stones
Italics are mine

Chuck Leavell is the grave digger of the real Rolling Stones ...

Quote
RobertJohnson

Quote
MarkSchneider
What about Chuck Leavell's role?

Interesting source (click on the link for the whole stuff):
[www.relix.com]
"...Mick (Taylor) is also much loved by the fans (not by Leavell?) for his time with the band. He brought a lot to the table in those years and brought it with him to the stage for these shows. It was tough to only have them (guest artists) play a song or two, but we also wanted to accommodate the other guest artists—and, of course, to play as the core band we have now. Eric (Clapton) was a highlight for me as I played with him for two-and-a-half years. He killed it on “Champagne and Reefer.” Mick doing “Midnight Rambler” made for a cool jam (didn't kill)..." CL

A model of stonewalling...


PS Leavell is musical director and setlist "inspirer" of the Rolling Stones
Italics are mine

Chuck Leavell is the grave digger of the real Rolling Stones ...

You may be right, but this tells me more about the level of the real Rolling Stones than Chuck Leavell's.

Quote
svt22

Quote
RobertJohnson

Quote
MarkSchneider
What about Chuck Leavell's role?

Interesting source (click on the link for the whole stuff):
[www.relix.com]
"...Mick (Taylor) is also much loved by the fans (not by Leavell?) for his time with the band. He brought a lot to the table in those years and brought it with him to the stage for these shows. It was tough to only have them (guest artists) play a song or two, but we also wanted to accommodate the other guest artists—and, of course, to play as the core band we have now. Eric (Clapton) was a highlight for me as I played with him for two-and-a-half years. He killed it on “Champagne and Reefer.” Mick doing “Midnight Rambler” made for a cool jam (didn't kill)..." CL

A model of stonewalling...


PS Leavell is musical director and setlist "inspirer" of the Rolling Stones
Italics are mine

Chuck Leavell is the grave digger of the real Rolling Stones ...

You may be right, but this tells me more about the level of the real Rolling Stones than Chuck Leavell's.

Yes indeed. If they (Mick) let Chuck decide ... Where was Keith btw, he seemed to love having Taylor on stage, kinda like in the good ol' days.

The nice chaps (ie KR, CW & RW) do not seem to weigh on decision making.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2013-07-20 18:13 by MarkSchneider.

Rehearsal time and the need for rearranging might have been the decider - the songs Mick Taylor played on were mainly those where he was just required to turn up and jam or solo, and nobody needed to sit down and re-cast all the guitar parts. That's a nice idea in theory, but hard work in practice, and the Stones are not known for devoting lots of time to rehearsal once they're on the road - a bit of laziness that is unlikely to improve with age.

Quote
kleermaker

Quote
svt22
It's all speculation. We should remember that the Stones have been very successful without Mick Taylor for about 40 years. They don't need him from a financial and musical point of view.

It depends on how you define successful. In terms of money and mass attention yes, but musically no way. At least to my musical ears. So from a musical point of view they need him badly, because without him I don't find the Stones interesting at all on stage. Not to speak of the latest studio albums.

I agree with you Kleermaker, I feel the same way. It's not always about the money, just ask Robert Plant.

Quote
MarkSchneider
The nice chaps (ie KR, CW & RW) do not seem to weigh on decision making.

If everything was left up to 'the nice chaps' you wouldn't even have a tour.

Quote
Green Lady
Rehearsal time and the need for rearranging might have been the decider - the songs Mick Taylor played on were mainly those where he was just required to turn up and jam or solo, and nobody needed to sit down and re-cast all the guitar parts. That's a nice idea in theory, but hard work in practice, and the Stones are not known for devoting lots of time to rehearsal once they're on the road - a bit of laziness that is unlikely to improve with age.

A BIT of laziness? That must be a typically British understatement. Lazy as hell. The rehearsing has to take place before the tour starts. Aside of that I doubt if a 3 guitar combination would have worked. But it could have been done, especially because Keith and Taylor understand and complement each other musically so well.

Quote
kleermaker

Quote
Green Lady
Rehearsal time and the need for rearranging might have been the decider - the songs Mick Taylor played on were mainly those where he was just required to turn up and jam or solo, and nobody needed to sit down and re-cast all the guitar parts. That's a nice idea in theory, but hard work in practice, and the Stones are not known for devoting lots of time to rehearsal once they're on the road - a bit of laziness that is unlikely to improve with age.

A BIT of laziness? That must be a typically British understatement. Lazy as hell. The rehearsing has to take place before the tour starts. Aside of that I doubt if a 3 guitar combination would have worked. But it could have been done, especially because Keith and Taylor understand and complement each other musically so well.

Once the pre-tour rehearsal period was over, they just didn't have any time factored in to work out any more MT songs between shows. That's the way they are and they are not likely to change now. If they do go out again in the autumn, there will be another spell of rehearsals and if they are going to add any more MT, that's when they will do it - if everybody wants to.

Quote
kleermaker

Quote
svt22

Quote
RobertJohnson

Quote
MarkSchneider
What about Chuck Leavell's role?

Interesting source (click on the link for the whole stuff):
[www.relix.com]
"...Mick (Taylor) is also much loved by the fans (not by Leavell?) for his time with the band. He brought a lot to the table in those years and brought it with him to the stage for these shows. It was tough to only have them (guest artists) play a song or two, but we also wanted to accommodate the other guest artists—and, of course, to play as the core band we have now. Eric (Clapton) was a highlight for me as I played with him for two-and-a-half years. He killed it on “Champagne and Reefer.” Mick doing “Midnight Rambler” made for a cool jam (didn't kill)..." CL

A model of stonewalling...


PS Leavell is musical director and setlist "inspirer" of the Rolling Stones
Italics are mine

Chuck Leavell is the grave digger of the real Rolling Stones ...

You may be right, but this tells me more about the level of the real Rolling Stones than Chuck Leavell's.

Yes indeed. If they (Mick) let Chuck decide ... Where was Keith btw, he seemed to love having Taylor on stage, kinda like in the good ol' days.

Mmmm...maybe it was Chuck all along that didn't want his role diminished with more Mick Taylor on stage and discouraged any additional Taylor time for whatever reasons...

Good Grief! You're still at it! Still repeating the same things and telling each other what you want to hear. This may be the longest thread but it's also the most boringly repetitive one.

Everyone gets it: you love, adore and kiss the boots of MT. You think he should play on more songs because he really really makes the Stones better. But mean insecure Mick Jagger is wary that MT might have too much influence on the band. Riiight.

Just listen to yourselves. You spew nonsense. Jagger is a superstar with or without the Stones. So are Keith, Charlie and Ronnie. They're much sought-after musicians who draw audiences and big bucks wherever they go. Unfortunately, it's MT who needs the Stones. You know that too. Sure he was important in their past -- but that was then. HE chose to leave; he wasn't fired. I'm not a bleeding heart to care if he was paid properly back then. He was a big boy and could have handled things differently if he wanted to. It's gracious of the group to bring him back, whether they felt they owe him something or just for kicks. Sure Keith said "once a Stone, always a Stone" but he said a lot of clever things like that. Mick Taylor is no longer a Stone. NOBODY thinks Taylor is a Stone.

Nobody except for the few of you on this thread who almost childishly idolize him and argue for him. (I think he'd be embarrassed by some of you. Stop acting like he's a child. You don't even know what he wants to do with the Stones.) Sure he gets applause -- hell, he's good. And audiences love seeing a past band member (of any band) make a return appearance, so they'll clap like crazy when he steps on stage. In Chicago they clapped a lot for Taylor Swift too!

MT is a wonderful guitarist but no longer fits in with the group. (Now I'm repeating myself.) I watched all the clips of this tour and I'm glad he started to smile, chat and walk around a bit. I felt sorry for him, when he played but stood like a mummy; people laughed at that.

Admit it boys and girls, most people at Stones concerts are not the music experts you folks "claim" to to be. They're talking and dancing, not listening as carefully as those of you who replay the clips on laptops 10 times. They came to see Mick, Keith, Charlie and Ronnie. Maybe some of you saw the Stones waaay back when, but this is NOW.

MT doesn't play how the Stones want to play on stage, like it or not. Personally, I think he was getting "into" the show aspect as the tour progressed. But who calls the shots? Him? Jagger? you folks? Why should the Stones go through extra practice to fit around MT's way of noodling after all these years? You idolize the guy so of course you think they should but come on....

Instead of repeating the same things on this thread, why don't you work on getting MT more publicity or even more appearances? (Some of you pretend to know people in the industry.) Then go to his shows, make him more successful, bring him more $$$. Put him on a diet and workout regime too. It'll be better for his health and he'll be much more appealing to audiences.

You whiners could do it -- so help your idol!

><

- Doxa

So, this Jesse person has returned after saying she was leaving the board for good (yes, it is just a message board, no need to take it too seriously). She only signed up to the board to say that Mick Taylor is too fat to play with the Stones. She has some kind of hang-up about overweight people because she made a similar remark about overweight fans. Other people's weight seems to be a rather ugly obsession of hers. She's in love with Ronnie Wood because he's thin and he clowns around on stage and looks happy, and not because of his guitar playing, which she seems to know little about. Guess what, how much a person weighs and whether they throw guitar picks into the audience and smile a lot has nothing to do with it. I admit I didn't go to the shows, but from the videos, both guys played well in their respective styles and abilities and there's no reason why Mick T. shouldn't be playing on more songs along with Ron and Keith. If the Eagles can handle four guitar players at the same time, then a guitar band such as the Stones should have no problem handling three.

I wonder if Jesse has any overweight family members or friends? I wonder if they know what her attitude is towards them?

Quote
Jesse
NOBODY thinks Taylor is a Stone.

I do think he is a Stone.

Marianna,

I wrote an extremely long blog -- eight paragraphs -- yet you only pay attention to my one snide comment about weight. You seem very sensitive about weight comments. Says more about you than me.

Quote
svt22

Quote
Jesse
NOBODY thinks Taylor is a Stone.

I do think he is a Stone.

At least you are not then a "nobody", which is good...ouch, doesn't she mean that this "nobody" thinks Taylor is a Stone, as you do, which makes you nobody...

- Doxa

Marianna,
if my overweight family members or friends were on a public stage with a bunch of skinny rockers, I'd certainly suggest they get in better shape and I'd offer to help them lose weight.

Why so personal? You sound like a petty little girl.

Quote
Doxa

Quote
svt22

Quote
Jesse
NOBODY thinks Taylor is a Stone.

I do think he is a Stone.

At least you are not then a "nobody", which is good...ouch, doesn't she mean that this "nobody" thinks Taylor is a Stone, as you do, which makes you nobody...

- Doxa

Enjoy, it is typically 1973

Quote
marianna
(yes, it is just a message board, no need to take it too seriously).

Indeed. This is just fun. I have personally subtitled this thread as "hopes and dreams". It is amazing how much people having hopes and dreams seem to annoy some other people...

- Doxa

Quote
Jesse
Marianna,

I wrote an extremely long blog -- eight paragraphs -- yet you only pay attention to my one snide comment about weight. You seem very sensitive about weight comments. Says more about you than me.

Your attitude says a lot about you. What, are you saying you think I'm fat and you imply you're thin? Guess what, I'm not fat, but I care about other people's feelings, unlike some people. But I know what kind of person signs up for a board to criticize the physical appearance of a member of a band. What does physical appearance have to do with being in a band? The only truly thin members of the Stones, anyways, are Jagger and Woods. They look anorexic and unhealthy. If that's what makes you want to throw your granny panties at the stage, so be it. It has nothing to do with music.

Marianna, stop embarrassing yourself.

Quote
Jesse
Marianna, stop embarrassing yourself.

Jesse, stop embarrassing yourself.

MICK TAYLOR is the one who is being embarrassed in many of these "show off" posts.

Why not let his playing speak for him?

Quote
stonesrule

Why not let his playing speak for him?

It does, it does... if they only let him speak some more...

- Doxa

Quote
marianna

Quote
Jesse
Marianna,

I wrote an extremely long blog -- eight paragraphs -- yet you only pay attention to my one snide comment about weight. You seem very sensitive about weight comments. Says more about you than me.

Your attitude says a lot about you. What, are you saying you think I'm fat and you imply you're thin? Guess what, I'm not fat, but I care about other people's feelings, unlike some people. But I know what kind of person signs up for a board to criticize the physical appearance of a member of a band. What does physical appearance have to do with being in a band? The only truly thin members of the Stones, anyways, are Jagger and Woods. They look anorexic and unhealthy. If that's what makes you want to throw your granny panties at the stage, so be it. It has nothing to do with music.

To throw panties on stage - it's an integral part of rock 'n' roll, at least in the opinion of Mick and Keith. It is very boring idea that r'n'roll is only music and nothing else
In Hyde Park July 13 they have thrown at Jagger something so big and white that it almost knocked him off his feet. It's fortunate that he's in good shape and managed to dodge.
btw, I wonder at what age your panties are considered to be granny's?

Quote
Jesse
Good Grief! You're still at it! Still repeating the same things and telling each other what you want to hear. This may be the longest thread but it's also the most boringly repetitive one.

Everyone gets it: you love, adore and kiss the boots of MT. You think he should play on more songs because he really really makes the Stones better. But mean insecure Mick Jagger is wary that MT might have too much influence on the band. Riiight.

Just listen to yourselves. You spew nonsense. Jagger is a superstar with or without the Stones. So are Keith, Charlie and Ronnie. They're much sought-after musicians who draw audiences and big bucks wherever they go. Unfortunately, it's MT who needs the Stones. You know that too. Sure he was important in their past -- but that was then. HE chose to leave; he wasn't fired. I'm not a bleeding heart to care if he was paid properly back then. He was a big boy and could have handled things differently if he wanted to. It's gracious of the group to bring him back, whether they felt they owe him something or just for kicks. Sure Keith said "once a Stone, always a Stone" but he said a lot of clever things like that. Mick Taylor is no longer a Stone. NOBODY thinks Taylor is a Stone.

Nobody except for the few of you on this thread who almost childishly idolize him and argue for him. (I think he'd be embarrassed by some of you. Stop acting like he's a child. You don't even know what he wants to do with the Stones.) Sure he gets applause -- hell, he's good. And audiences love seeing a past band member (of any band) make a return appearance, so they'll clap like crazy when he steps on stage. In Chicago they clapped a lot for Taylor Swift too!

MT is a wonderful guitarist but no longer fits in with the group. (Now I'm repeating myself.) I watched all the clips of this tour and I'm glad he started to smile, chat and walk around a bit. I felt sorry for him, when he played but stood like a mummy; people laughed at that.

Admit it boys and girls, most people at Stones concerts are not the music experts you folks "claim" to to be. They're talking and dancing, not listening as carefully as those of you who replay the clips on laptops 10 times. They came to see Mick, Keith, Charlie and Ronnie. Maybe some of you saw the Stones waaay back when, but this is NOW.

MT doesn't play how the Stones want to play on stage, like it or not. Personally, I think he was getting "into" the show aspect as the tour progressed. But who calls the shots? Him? Jagger? you folks? Why should the Stones go through extra practice to fit around MT's way of noodling after all these years? You idolize the guy so of course you think they should but come on....

Instead of repeating the same things on this thread, why don't you work on getting MT more publicity or even more appearances? (Some of you pretend to know people in the industry.) Then go to his shows, make him more successful, bring him more $$$. Put him on a diet and workout regime too. It'll be better for his health and he'll be much more appealing to audiences.

You whiners could do it -- so help your idol!

Is this you speaking Jesse or your husband? Let's hope for you it's him, because such an 'argument' from somone who teaches art, well ...

Quote
Jesse
Good Grief! You're still at it! Still repeating the same things and telling each other what you want to hear. This may be the longest thread but it's also the most boringly repetitive one.

Everyone gets it: you love, adore and kiss the boots of MT. You think he should play on more songs because he really really makes the Stones better. But mean insecure Mick Jagger is wary that MT might have too much influence on the band. Riiight.

Just listen to yourselves. You spew nonsense. Jagger is a superstar with or without the Stones. So are Keith, Charlie and Ronnie. They're much sought-after musicians who draw audiences and big bucks wherever they go. Unfortunately, it's MT who needs the Stones. You know that too. Sure he was important in their past -- but that was then. HE chose to leave; he wasn't fired. I'm not a bleeding heart to care if he was paid properly back then. He was a big boy and could have handled things differently if he wanted to. It's gracious of the group to bring him back, whether they felt they owe him something or just for kicks. Sure Keith said "once a Stone, always a Stone" but he said a lot of clever things like that. Mick Taylor is no longer a Stone. NOBODY thinks Taylor is a Stone.

Nobody except for the few of you on this thread who almost childishly idolize him and argue for him. (I think he'd be embarrassed by some of you. Stop acting like he's a child. You don't even know what he wants to do with the Stones.) Sure he gets applause -- hell, he's good. And audiences love seeing a past band member (of any band) make a return appearance, so they'll clap like crazy when he steps on stage. In Chicago they clapped a lot for Taylor Swift too!

MT is a wonderful guitarist but no longer fits in with the group. (Now I'm repeating myself.) I watched all the clips of this tour and I'm glad he started to smile, chat and walk around a bit. I felt sorry for him, when he played but stood like a mummy; people laughed at that.

Admit it boys and girls, most people at Stones concerts are not the music experts you folks "claim" to to be. They're talking and dancing, not listening as carefully as those of you who replay the clips on laptops 10 times. They came to see Mick, Keith, Charlie and Ronnie. Maybe some of you saw the Stones waaay back when, but this is NOW.

MT doesn't play how the Stones want to play on stage, like it or not. Personally, I think he was getting "into" the show aspect as the tour progressed. But who calls the shots? Him? Jagger? you folks? Why should the Stones go through extra practice to fit around MT's way of noodling after all these years? You idolize the guy so of course you think they should but come on....

Instead of repeating the same things on this thread, why don't you work on getting MT more publicity or even more appearances? (Some of you pretend to know people in the industry.) Then go to his shows, make him more successful, bring him more $$$. Put him on a diet and workout regime too. It'll be better for his health and he'll be much more appealing to audiences.

You whiners could do it -- so help your idol!

Standing "O".

This thread's a mess...

Quote
DandelionPowderman
This thread's a mess...

I recall you did a promise regarding this thread. Forgotten?